[ADPinWDC]

Kal beat us twice; they get into NCAAs before we do.  
Play in the NIT; might win it.

[ADPinWDC]

Kal beat us twice; they get into NCAAs before we do.  
Play in the NIT; might win it.

[Card10Fan]

VA Tech also right by us on the bubble bows out in ACC first round too. If Cal loses tomorrow too, do all 3 of us ACC bubble teams end up on the outside? Possibly.

[Card10Fan]

VA Tech also right by us on the bubble bows out in ACC first round too. If Cal loses tomorrow too, do all 3 of us ACC bubble teams end up on the outside? Possibly.

[Mick]

CBS Bracketology now has Cal in the last four in, and Stanford in the first four out.

Bracketology 2026 - NCAA Tournament Predictions - CBS Sports

[Mick]

CBS Bracketology now has Cal in the last four in, and Stanford in the first four out.

Bracketology 2026 - NCAA Tournament Predictions - CBS Sports

[Treebound]

Cheering against Cal and NC State today, just in case Kyle is right.  Let's hope they both lose.  Go Pitt....still not happy that we didn't finish yesterday. Arghh!

[Treebound]

Cheering against Cal and NC State today, just in case Kyle is right.  Let's hope they both lose.  Go Pitt....still not happy that we didn't finish yesterday. Arghh!

[Papa John]

That's a shame. Hopefully they keep Okorie (although if he wants to resurrect a certain team in Atlanta....) and Smith is better than just another NIT coach when all is said and done. I'll latch onto the Hoos for a run and maybe Queens College. (Can't bring myself to care about the Not In Tournament tournament.)

Someone said that this might be the first time Stanford wasn't in a bowl game, M or W NCAA Tournament, or College World Series since the '70s. Hard to prove a negative, but I find that hard to believe. 

If we are going to destroy the world with data centers, might as well use them. The list since 1970 is neither long nor short. (Took Copilot some time and Python - so much cross referencing and it had a hard time deciding what a 'year' is since academic years cover two distinct calendar years. Better than me doing it, anyway.)

1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2019, 2024

So five times since the 70s or 4 times if you count decades one to ten instead of zero to nine.

But if the larger point is that Stanford sports ain't what they used to be; it seems so. Stanford was crushing it from 1986 through 2018. That isn't a surprise given WBB dominance, and long stretches of strong performances in football, MBB, and baseball. The quad years (all 4 of the power sports reaching post season) are 1996, 1999, and 2001. That's the sum total. Alright, it has been a while.

It was I, jacket3ree. Instead of College World Series, I meant college baseball playoffs, which would be more in line with football making a bowl game or basketball making the NCAA tournament. Thanks for catching that. Let me offer my revisions.

The women's basketball team made the playoffs in 1977-78, 78-79 and 79-80--only it was the AIAW tournament, as the NCAA didn't start sponsoring women's basketball until 1981-82 (!). Stanford baseball had an eight-year run of making the playoffs starting in spring 1981. So that takes care of the 1980-1981, 82-83 and 84-85 years. I think that we can put an asterisk next to 2019-20 since both basketball tournaments were canceled but the women were obviously going to be in it. So last year was the first time since 1976-77, I think, that Stanford did not have at least one of the following:
* a bowl game for football
* post-season tournament for baseball
* the best available post-season tournament for men's or women's basketball

[Papa John]

That's a shame. Hopefully they keep Okorie (although if he wants to resurrect a certain team in Atlanta....) and Smith is better than just another NIT coach when all is said and done. I'll latch onto the Hoos for a run and maybe Queens College. (Can't bring myself to care about the Not In Tournament tournament.)

Someone said that this might be the first time Stanford wasn't in a bowl game, M or W NCAA Tournament, or College World Series since the '70s. Hard to prove a negative, but I find that hard to believe. 

If we are going to destroy the world with data centers, might as well use them. The list since 1970 is neither long nor short. (Took Copilot some time and Python - so much cross referencing and it had a hard time deciding what a 'year' is since academic years cover two distinct calendar years. Better than me doing it, anyway.)

1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2019, 2024

So five times since the 70s or 4 times if you count decades one to ten instead of zero to nine.

But if the larger point is that Stanford sports ain't what they used to be; it seems so. Stanford was crushing it from 1986 through 2018. That isn't a surprise given WBB dominance, and long stretches of strong performances in football, MBB, and baseball. The quad years (all 4 of the power sports reaching post season) are 1996, 1999, and 2001. That's the sum total. Alright, it has been a while.

It was I, jacket3ree. Instead of College World Series, I meant college baseball playoffs, which would be more in line with football making a bowl game or basketball making the NCAA tournament. Thanks for catching that. Let me offer my revisions.

The women's basketball team made the playoffs in 1977-78, 78-79 and 79-80--only it was the AIAW tournament, as the NCAA didn't start sponsoring women's basketball until 1981-82 (!). Stanford baseball had an eight-year run of making the playoffs starting in spring 1981. So that takes care of the 1980-1981, 82-83 and 84-85 years. I think that we can put an asterisk next to 2019-20 since both basketball tournaments were canceled but the women were obviously going to be in it. So last year was the first time since 1976-77, I think, that Stanford did not have at least one of the following:
* a bowl game for football
* post-season tournament for baseball
* the best available post-season tournament for men's or women's basketball

[burger]

Cheering against Cal and NC State today, just in case Kyle is right.  Let's hope they both lose.  Go Pitt....still not happy that we didn't finish yesterday. Arghh!

Well, at least one coach in the ACC knows how to keep Pitt off the boards. With 6 minutes to go in the NC St. game, Pitt has 4 offensive rebounds.

I believe they had 90* offensive rebounds at the same point yesterday.

*rough estimate--I was too demoralized to look at the box score.

[burger]

Cheering against Cal and NC State today, just in case Kyle is right.  Let's hope they both lose.  Go Pitt....still not happy that we didn't finish yesterday. Arghh!

Well, at least one coach in the ACC knows how to keep Pitt off the boards. With 6 minutes to go in the NC St. game, Pitt has 4 offensive rebounds.

I believe they had 90* offensive rebounds at the same point yesterday.

*rough estimate--I was too demoralized to look at the box score.

[Oskidunker]

Cheering against Cal and NC State today, just in case Kyle is right.  Let's hope they both lose.  Go Pitt....still not happy that we didn't finish yesterday. Arghh!

Well, at least one coach in the ACC knows how to keep Pitt off the boards. With 6 minutes to go in the NC St. game, Pitt has 4 offensive rebounds.

I believe they had 90* offensive rebounds at the same point yesterday.

*rough estimate--I was too demoralized to look at the box score.

Welcome to the NIT. The only question is will the game be at Maples or Haas?

[Oskidunker]

Cheering against Cal and NC State today, just in case Kyle is right.  Let's hope they both lose.  Go Pitt....still not happy that we didn't finish yesterday. Arghh!

Well, at least one coach in the ACC knows how to keep Pitt off the boards. With 6 minutes to go in the NC St. game, Pitt has 4 offensive rebounds.

I believe they had 90* offensive rebounds at the same point yesterday.

*rough estimate--I was too demoralized to look at the box score.

Welcome to the NIT. The only question is will the game be at Maples or Haas?

[needle]

Blame The Cranberries:

On Tuesday, the 15th-seeded Pitt scored an upset win over Stanford in the opening game of the ACC tournament. It was a closely contested game, and Pitt won it by a single point, 64-63. The true hero of the game was senior guard Damarco Minor, who caught his own rebound and scored with less than a second on the clock. But in a game that close, anything can make a difference. So maybe the deciding factor was the one mysterious, extremely loud person, presumably a Pitt fan, who spent the game's second half bellowing '90s alt-rock ballads at Stanford players.

https://stereogum.com/2491941/someones-o...-them/news

[needle]

Blame The Cranberries:

On Tuesday, the 15th-seeded Pitt scored an upset win over Stanford in the opening game of the ACC tournament. It was a closely contested game, and Pitt won it by a single point, 64-63. The true hero of the game was senior guard Damarco Minor, who caught his own rebound and scored with less than a second on the clock. But in a game that close, anything can make a difference. So maybe the deciding factor was the one mysterious, extremely loud person, presumably a Pitt fan, who spent the game's second half bellowing '90s alt-rock ballads at Stanford players.

https://stereogum.com/2491941/someones-o...-them/news

[BostonCard]

That's a shame. Hopefully they keep Okorie (although if he wants to resurrect a certain team in Atlanta....) and Smith is better than just another NIT coach when all is said and done. I'll latch onto the Hoos for a run and maybe Queens College. (Can't bring myself to care about the Not In Tournament tournament.)

Someone said that this might be the first time Stanford wasn't in a bowl game, M or W NCAA Tournament, or College World Series since the '70s. Hard to prove a negative, but I find that hard to believe. 

If we are going to destroy the world with data centers, might as well use them. The list since 1970 is neither long nor short. (Took Copilot some time and Python - so much cross referencing and it had a hard time deciding what a 'year' is since academic years cover two distinct calendar years. Better than me doing it, anyway.)

1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2019, 2024

So five times since the 70s or 4 times if you count decades one to ten instead of zero to nine.

But if the larger point is that Stanford sports ain't what they used to be; it seems so. Stanford was crushing it from 1986 through 2018. That isn't a surprise given WBB dominance, and long stretches of strong performances in football, MBB, and baseball. The quad years (all 4 of the power sports reaching post season) are 1996, 1999, and 2001. That's the sum total. Alright, it has been a while.

It was I, jacket3ree. Instead of College World Series, I meant college baseball playoffs, which would be more in line with football making a bowl game or basketball making the NCAA tournament. Thanks for catching that. Let me offer my revisions.

The women's basketball team made the playoffs in 1977-78, 78-79 and 79-80--only it was the AIAW tournament, as the NCAA didn't start sponsoring women's basketball until 1981-82 (!). Stanford baseball had an eight-year run of making the playoffs starting in spring 1981. So that takes care of the 1980-1981, 82-83 and 84-85 years. I think that we can put an asterisk next to 2019-20 since both basketball tournaments were canceled but the women were obviously going to be in it. So last year was the first time since 1976-77, I think, that Stanford did not have at least one of the following:
* a bowl game for football
* post-season tournament for baseball
* the best available post-season tournament for men's or women's basketball

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the sports most impacted by NIL and the portal are the ones that are struggling the most, sometimes in a historical way.  You can make arguments that women’s basketball should have performed better than it did or that men’s basketball over performed expectations, or that football has had a long-running downtrend… but at the end of the day, all four sports have been on a multi-year downtrend compared to their historical averages and I don’t think it is a coincidence.  The current situation disadvantages Stanford revenue sports.

BC

[BostonCard]

That's a shame. Hopefully they keep Okorie (although if he wants to resurrect a certain team in Atlanta....) and Smith is better than just another NIT coach when all is said and done. I'll latch onto the Hoos for a run and maybe Queens College. (Can't bring myself to care about the Not In Tournament tournament.)

Someone said that this might be the first time Stanford wasn't in a bowl game, M or W NCAA Tournament, or College World Series since the '70s. Hard to prove a negative, but I find that hard to believe. 

If we are going to destroy the world with data centers, might as well use them. The list since 1970 is neither long nor short. (Took Copilot some time and Python - so much cross referencing and it had a hard time deciding what a 'year' is since academic years cover two distinct calendar years. Better than me doing it, anyway.)

1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2019, 2024

So five times since the 70s or 4 times if you count decades one to ten instead of zero to nine.

But if the larger point is that Stanford sports ain't what they used to be; it seems so. Stanford was crushing it from 1986 through 2018. That isn't a surprise given WBB dominance, and long stretches of strong performances in football, MBB, and baseball. The quad years (all 4 of the power sports reaching post season) are 1996, 1999, and 2001. That's the sum total. Alright, it has been a while.

It was I, jacket3ree. Instead of College World Series, I meant college baseball playoffs, which would be more in line with football making a bowl game or basketball making the NCAA tournament. Thanks for catching that. Let me offer my revisions.

The women's basketball team made the playoffs in 1977-78, 78-79 and 79-80--only it was the AIAW tournament, as the NCAA didn't start sponsoring women's basketball until 1981-82 (!). Stanford baseball had an eight-year run of making the playoffs starting in spring 1981. So that takes care of the 1980-1981, 82-83 and 84-85 years. I think that we can put an asterisk next to 2019-20 since both basketball tournaments were canceled but the women were obviously going to be in it. So last year was the first time since 1976-77, I think, that Stanford did not have at least one of the following:
* a bowl game for football
* post-season tournament for baseball
* the best available post-season tournament for men's or women's basketball

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the sports most impacted by NIL and the portal are the ones that are struggling the most, sometimes in a historical way.  You can make arguments that women’s basketball should have performed better than it did or that men’s basketball over performed expectations, or that football has had a long-running downtrend… but at the end of the day, all four sports have been on a multi-year downtrend compared to their historical averages and I don’t think it is a coincidence.  The current situation disadvantages Stanford revenue sports.

BC

[ADPinWDC]

March Madness already underway, TONIGHT
Big12 (and ESPN) got their own Final Four matchups they wanted for viewership: 
#7 IAST vs #2 ZONA, 7pm on ESPN
#14 KANS vs #5 HOUS, 9:30pm ESPN
Superb players on display in both games

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men...basketball

[ADPinWDC]

March Madness already underway, TONIGHT
Big12 (and ESPN) got their own Final Four matchups they wanted for viewership: 
#7 IAST vs #2 ZONA, 7pm on ESPN
#14 KANS vs #5 HOUS, 9:30pm ESPN
Superb players on display in both games

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men...basketball

[Hieronymus]

That's a shame. Hopefully they keep Okorie (although if he wants to resurrect a certain team in Atlanta....) and Smith is better than just another NIT coach when all is said and done. I'll latch onto the Hoos for a run and maybe Queens College. (Can't bring myself to care about the Not In Tournament tournament.)

Someone said that this might be the first time Stanford wasn't in a bowl game, M or W NCAA Tournament, or College World Series since the '70s. Hard to prove a negative, but I find that hard to believe. 

If we are going to destroy the world with data centers, might as well use them. The list since 1970 is neither long nor short. (Took Copilot some time and Python - so much cross referencing and it had a hard time deciding what a 'year' is since academic years cover two distinct calendar years. Better than me doing it, anyway.)

1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2019, 2024

So five times since the 70s or 4 times if you count decades one to ten instead of zero to nine.

But if the larger point is that Stanford sports ain't what they used to be; it seems so. Stanford was crushing it from 1986 through 2018. That isn't a surprise given WBB dominance, and long stretches of strong performances in football, MBB, and baseball. The quad years (all 4 of the power sports reaching post season) are 1996, 1999, and 2001. That's the sum total. Alright, it has been a while.

It was I, jacket3ree. Instead of College World Series, I meant college baseball playoffs, which would be more in line with football making a bowl game or basketball making the NCAA tournament. Thanks for catching that. Let me offer my revisions.

The women's basketball team made the playoffs in 1977-78, 78-79 and 79-80--only it was the AIAW tournament, as the NCAA didn't start sponsoring women's basketball until 1981-82 (!). Stanford baseball had an eight-year run of making the playoffs starting in spring 1981. So that takes care of the 1980-1981, 82-83 and 84-85 years. I think that we can put an asterisk next to 2019-20 since both basketball tournaments were canceled but the women were obviously going to be in it. So last year was the first time since 1976-77, I think, that Stanford did not have at least one of the following:
* a bowl game for football
* post-season tournament for baseball
* the best available post-season tournament for men's or women's basketball

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the sports most impacted by NIL and the portal are the ones that are struggling the most, sometimes in a historical way.  You can make arguments that women’s basketball should have performed better than it did or that men’s basketball over performed expectations, or that football has had a long-running downtrend… but at the end of the day, all four sports have been on a multi-year downtrend compared to their historical averages and I don’t think it is a coincidence.  The current situation disadvantages Stanford revenue sports.

BC

And WVB may be starting a similar slide as big money ($1 million plus for pins) comes into the game.

[Hieronymus]

That's a shame. Hopefully they keep Okorie (although if he wants to resurrect a certain team in Atlanta....) and Smith is better than just another NIT coach when all is said and done. I'll latch onto the Hoos for a run and maybe Queens College. (Can't bring myself to care about the Not In Tournament tournament.)

Someone said that this might be the first time Stanford wasn't in a bowl game, M or W NCAA Tournament, or College World Series since the '70s. Hard to prove a negative, but I find that hard to believe. 

If we are going to destroy the world with data centers, might as well use them. The list since 1970 is neither long nor short. (Took Copilot some time and Python - so much cross referencing and it had a hard time deciding what a 'year' is since academic years cover two distinct calendar years. Better than me doing it, anyway.)

1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2019, 2024

So five times since the 70s or 4 times if you count decades one to ten instead of zero to nine.

But if the larger point is that Stanford sports ain't what they used to be; it seems so. Stanford was crushing it from 1986 through 2018. That isn't a surprise given WBB dominance, and long stretches of strong performances in football, MBB, and baseball. The quad years (all 4 of the power sports reaching post season) are 1996, 1999, and 2001. That's the sum total. Alright, it has been a while.

It was I, jacket3ree. Instead of College World Series, I meant college baseball playoffs, which would be more in line with football making a bowl game or basketball making the NCAA tournament. Thanks for catching that. Let me offer my revisions.

The women's basketball team made the playoffs in 1977-78, 78-79 and 79-80--only it was the AIAW tournament, as the NCAA didn't start sponsoring women's basketball until 1981-82 (!). Stanford baseball had an eight-year run of making the playoffs starting in spring 1981. So that takes care of the 1980-1981, 82-83 and 84-85 years. I think that we can put an asterisk next to 2019-20 since both basketball tournaments were canceled but the women were obviously going to be in it. So last year was the first time since 1976-77, I think, that Stanford did not have at least one of the following:
* a bowl game for football
* post-season tournament for baseball
* the best available post-season tournament for men's or women's basketball

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the sports most impacted by NIL and the portal are the ones that are struggling the most, sometimes in a historical way.  You can make arguments that women’s basketball should have performed better than it did or that men’s basketball over performed expectations, or that football has had a long-running downtrend… but at the end of the day, all four sports have been on a multi-year downtrend compared to their historical averages and I don’t think it is a coincidence.  The current situation disadvantages Stanford revenue sports.

BC

And WVB may be starting a similar slide as big money ($1 million plus for pins) comes into the game.

[BostonCard]

Yeah, we will see who beyond Nebraska, Texas, and TAMU tries to buy themselves a national title, but I agree, some “non-revenue” sports will start to see increasing amounts of money creep in.  WVB is one and we’ve already seen it with Softball and Cannady.  Wish it weren’t so, but alas.

I think the only saving grace is that the amounts are probably going to be smaller and more targeted.  I could see someone trying to lure the the top couple players in the country, but I have a hard time seeing teams competing for the next tier, so I could see Stanford having trouble competing for a national title the way we might have been a decade ago, but I don’t think (or at least, I hope) we don’t have quite as dramatic a tumble as the more financially competitive revenue sports.

BC

[BostonCard]

Yeah, we will see who beyond Nebraska, Texas, and TAMU tries to buy themselves a national title, but I agree, some “non-revenue” sports will start to see increasing amounts of money creep in.  WVB is one and we’ve already seen it with Softball and Cannady.  Wish it weren’t so, but alas.

I think the only saving grace is that the amounts are probably going to be smaller and more targeted.  I could see someone trying to lure the the top couple players in the country, but I have a hard time seeing teams competing for the next tier, so I could see Stanford having trouble competing for a national title the way we might have been a decade ago, but I don’t think (or at least, I hope) we don’t have quite as dramatic a tumble as the more financially competitive revenue sports.

BC

[Papa John]

Sorry for the thread drift, but some on this board might be interested to know that Nijaree Canady and Texas Tech got run-ruled tonight, 9-0 in five innings, by Arizona. Canady gave up all 9 runs although only 4 of them were earned. Still, in 4 innings she gave up 6 hits including 2 HRs (1 was a grand slam), 2 BBs and 1 HBP.

[Papa John]

Sorry for the thread drift, but some on this board might be interested to know that Nijaree Canady and Texas Tech got run-ruled tonight, 9-0 in five innings, by Arizona. Canady gave up all 9 runs although only 4 of them were earned. Still, in 4 innings she gave up 6 hits including 2 HRs (1 was a grand slam), 2 BBs and 1 HBP.

[martyup]

Sorry for the thread drift, but some on this board might be interested to know that Nijaree Canady and Texas Tech got run-ruled tonight, 9-0 in five innings, by Arizona. Canady gave up all 9 runs although only 4 of them were earned. Still, in 4 innings she gave up 6 hits including 2 HRs (1 was a grand slam), 2 BBs and 1 HBP.

Will they dock her pay?

[martyup]

Sorry for the thread drift, but some on this board might be interested to know that Nijaree Canady and Texas Tech got run-ruled tonight, 9-0 in five innings, by Arizona. Canady gave up all 9 runs although only 4 of them were earned. Still, in 4 innings she gave up 6 hits including 2 HRs (1 was a grand slam), 2 BBs and 1 HBP.

Will they dock her pay?

[Papa John]

Sorry for the thread drift, but some on this board might be interested to know that Nijaree Canady and Texas Tech got run-ruled tonight, 9-0 in five innings, by Arizona. Canady gave up all 9 runs although only 4 of them were earned. Still, in 4 innings she gave up 6 hits including 2 HRs (1 was a grand slam), 2 BBs and 1 HBP.

Will they dock her pay?

Probably not since she threw 5 shoutout innings in a run-rule win vs Arizona earlier today (Saturday).

[Papa John]

Sorry for the thread drift, but some on this board might be interested to know that Nijaree Canady and Texas Tech got run-ruled tonight, 9-0 in five innings, by Arizona. Canady gave up all 9 runs although only 4 of them were earned. Still, in 4 innings she gave up 6 hits including 2 HRs (1 was a grand slam), 2 BBs and 1 HBP.

Will they dock her pay?

Probably not since she threw 5 shoutout innings in a run-rule win vs Arizona earlier today (Saturday).

[Card10Fan]

Yeah, we will see who beyond Nebraska, Texas, and TAMU tries to buy themselves a national title, but I agree, some “non-revenue” sports will start to see increasing amounts of money creep in.  WVB is one and we’ve already seen it with Softball and Cannady.  Wish it weren’t so, but alas.

I think the only saving grace is that the amounts are probably going to be smaller and more targeted.  I could see someone trying to lure the the top couple players in the country, but I have a hard time seeing teams competing for the next tier, so I could see Stanford having trouble competing for a national title the way we might have been a decade ago, but I don’t think (or at least, I hope) we don’t have quite as dramatic a tumble as the more financially competitive revenue sports.

BC

Yes Dunkle left the team and transferred out. But overall Stanford volleyball has been incredibly successful at retaining our talent. The portal and such and money hasn’t really led to many transfers out. Hope that continues.

[Card10Fan]

Yeah, we will see who beyond Nebraska, Texas, and TAMU tries to buy themselves a national title, but I agree, some “non-revenue” sports will start to see increasing amounts of money creep in.  WVB is one and we’ve already seen it with Softball and Cannady.  Wish it weren’t so, but alas.

I think the only saving grace is that the amounts are probably going to be smaller and more targeted.  I could see someone trying to lure the the top couple players in the country, but I have a hard time seeing teams competing for the next tier, so I could see Stanford having trouble competing for a national title the way we might have been a decade ago, but I don’t think (or at least, I hope) we don’t have quite as dramatic a tumble as the more financially competitive revenue sports.

BC

Yes Dunkle left the team and transferred out. But overall Stanford volleyball has been incredibly successful at retaining our talent. The portal and such and money hasn’t really led to many transfers out. Hope that continues.

[Hieronymus]

Yeah, we will see who beyond Nebraska, Texas, and TAMU tries to buy themselves a national title, but I agree, some “non-revenue” sports will start to see increasing amounts of money creep in.  WVB is one and we’ve already seen it with Softball and Cannady.  Wish it weren’t so, but alas.

I think the only saving grace is that the amounts are probably going to be smaller and more targeted.  I could see someone trying to lure the the top couple players in the country, but I have a hard time seeing teams competing for the next tier, so I could see Stanford having trouble competing for a national title the way we might have been a decade ago, but I don’t think (or at least, I hope) we don’t have quite as dramatic a tumble as the more financially competitive revenue sports.

BC

Yes Dunkle left the team and transferred out. But overall Stanford volleyball has been incredibly successful at retaining our talent. The portal and such and money hasn’t really led to many transfers out. Hope that continues.

I would argue this reality for WVB is already here. No final 4 appearances since 2019 (6 years). Lost in the round of 16 this year, and it’s not clear next year will be a lot better with Rubin graduating. And yes we have not had a lot of transfers out, but we also mostly aren’t the getting elite hitters as recruits in the first place.

WVB is still very good, but I don’t think you can say we are an elite (top 6-8) program or a title contender right now.

[Hieronymus]

Yeah, we will see who beyond Nebraska, Texas, and TAMU tries to buy themselves a national title, but I agree, some “non-revenue” sports will start to see increasing amounts of money creep in.  WVB is one and we’ve already seen it with Softball and Cannady.  Wish it weren’t so, but alas.

I think the only saving grace is that the amounts are probably going to be smaller and more targeted.  I could see someone trying to lure the the top couple players in the country, but I have a hard time seeing teams competing for the next tier, so I could see Stanford having trouble competing for a national title the way we might have been a decade ago, but I don’t think (or at least, I hope) we don’t have quite as dramatic a tumble as the more financially competitive revenue sports.

BC

Yes Dunkle left the team and transferred out. But overall Stanford volleyball has been incredibly successful at retaining our talent. The portal and such and money hasn’t really led to many transfers out. Hope that continues.

I would argue this reality for WVB is already here. No final 4 appearances since 2019 (6 years). Lost in the round of 16 this year, and it’s not clear next year will be a lot better with Rubin graduating. And yes we have not had a lot of transfers out, but we also mostly aren’t the getting elite hitters as recruits in the first place.

WVB is still very good, but I don’t think you can say we are an elite (top 6-8) program or a title contender right now.

[BobK]

Yes we are elite and will be this season

[BobK]

Yes we are elite and will be this season

[BostonCard]

Yeah, but contrast a down period in WVB, which is undeniable but still involves winning the ACC and being a top-10 program versus the bigger sports where the down period means not making the tournament or a bowl game.

BC

[BostonCard]

Yeah, but contrast a down period in WVB, which is undeniable but still involves winning the ACC and being a top-10 program versus the bigger sports where the down period means not making the tournament or a bowl game.

BC

[needle]

Yes, I watched the selection show.

No, Stanford did not get in.

Did learn that Stanford beat five tourney teams this year -- SMU, L'ville, NC State, North Carolina and Saint Louis.

ACC gets 8 teams in. Kal not one of them.

[needle]

Yes, I watched the selection show.

No, Stanford did not get in.

Did learn that Stanford beat five tourney teams this year -- SMU, L'ville, NC State, North Carolina and Saint Louis.

ACC gets 8 teams in. Kal not one of them.